 maartenaElmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA |
to joshuad31
Re: If DirecTV runs fiber to my building why can't I get faster U-verse service?said by joshuad31:so what I expected is that they could take their direcTV setup and use it to provide FIOS type internet service where you are able to connect to their fiber network with the coax that is already physically installed in your building going from your apartment to the NID at the bottom of the building. No the fiber is exclusive to DirecTV, and goes to a central dish. When your building gets gigapower, they will run fiber in from the street (wherever the AT&T network connects to the building) and then fiber to each unit from there, replacing the copper cabling to each unit. |
|
 ILpt4U
Premium Member
join:2006-11-12
Saint Louis, MO
Asus RT-N66
|
ILpt4U
Premium Member
2016-Nov-8 1:04 am
said by maartena:No the fiber is exclusive to DirecTV, and goes to a central dish. When your building gets gigapower, they will run fiber in from the street (wherever the AT&T network connects to the building) and then fiber to each unit from there, replacing the copper cabling to each unit. That would be the common, "normal" solution. But if DTV (or the rumored Post U-verse/DirecTV PayTV product) ultimately can be delivered over IP, that current Distribution Fiber could be repurposed, with AT&T running Outside Plant Fiber to wherever that Central Dish is, and then connect to the existing Distribution Fiber, and replace the Fiber/Coax media converters in the Telecom Closet to GPON MDU ONTs. From MDU ONTs Ethernet, or even G.fast, or heck even DOCSIS could deliver IP to individual units via Cat 5e or Coax drops Will AT&T? Who knows. Could it be done that way? Sure. Could it be done pulling all brand new Fiber? Thats possible too |
|
| |
to maartena
maartena wrote:
No the fiber is exclusive to DirecTV, and goes to a central dish. When your building gets gigapower, they will run fiber in from the street (wherever the AT&T network connects to the building) and then fiber to each unit from there, replacing the copper cabling to each unit.
The way users understand the world is different from technical telecom professionals. I only know the following facts:
1. In the same apartment complex there are two providers but no ability for consumers to choose their provider.
2. If you live on the west side of the complex you must choose AT&T U-verse as your provider. If you live on the east side of the complex you must choose Frontier (Verizon) Fios.
3. My service was so bad I had no choice but to move from AT&Ts U-verse side to the Verizon side.
4. Opening up a complaint with the FCC and the BBB did nothing to fix the problem because the engineers that AT&T send out to come onsite tell you "I can't troubleshoot packet loss just connectivity and speed."
5. The situation seems messed up to me for the following reasons:
A. AT&T cant provide reliable service
B. I can't get fios even thou my neighbors 3 blocks away can.
C. If Verizon could lease out DirecTVs fiber lines and coax infrastructure then maybe I could get Fios.
I'm just pissed that I had to move. I tried to get my neighbors to open FCC / BBB complaints but they all use the internet for netflix, youtube, and sending emails not for any business critical uses so most poeple don't seem to care that there is a lot of packet loss in our building. I can't get AT&T to refund me back the first two months I paid. I also can't get them to pay for moving costs. That doesn't seem right to me.
Everyone seems to think that this messed up arrangement is perfectly normal and I just don't get it. There is fiber going to my building it is just being poorly used. If it could be leased out to someone who wants to use it to give me good service then I might have a choice.
Can anyone explain to me why this sort of two providers 0 choice for consumers in the same apartment complex setup is normal? Can anyone explain to me why DirecTV can't just lease out their last mile fiber / coax infrastructure to Verizon so I can get decent service? Can any one tell me why people in my building don't care that they have 10% packet loss.
I'm not interested in all of the technical telecom terminology although I am a network engineer and I do understand IP networks. I just care about the practical common sense understanding that helps me to know why I got screwed out of 500 dollars between internet costs and moving costs not to mention the stress of dealing with their broken system. Why does AT&T suck so bad as a provider and what can consumers do about it if the FCC / BBB complain mechanism does nothing to fix problems?
Are any laws being broken here when consumers are not given a choice and when service is so bad that people who need access to business critical internet with decent uptime are forced to move?
Explain it to me like I'm not in telecom
Thanks
Joshua |
|
ILpt4U
Premium Member
join:2006-11-12
Saint Louis, MO ARRIS TM822
Asus RT-N66
3 edits |
ILpt4U
Premium Member
2016-Nov-8 1:31 am
There are no laws against ILECs overbuilding each other, but it is extremely rare. Verizon (before selling to Frontier) overbuilt AT&T in some Suburban Dallas, TX areas, and AT&T is overbuilding Frontier in Durham, NC, but outside that, one ILEC overbuilding another generally doesn't happen The old ILEC exchange/Wire Center boundry must run thru this complex, hence why some buildings are in Legacy GTE/Verizon/now Frontier ILEC territory, and some buildings are in Legacy Southwestern Bell/SBC/now AT&T ILEC territory. Lines that were drawn on a map, a long time ago Could Frontier pull FiOS to the rest of the Complex? Your Landlord/Property Manager/Association would probably have to get with a Frontier Sales Manager AND a Frontier Plant Engineer, but if there is a model for success and a potentially high take rate, its possible Frontier might extend the FiOS network to the entire Complex. Or, to go the other way, could AT&T Pull GigaPower to at least its half of the Complex, if not the whole Complex? Again, would need to get in touch with an AT&T Sales Manager (AT&T Connected Communities does have a website for this, too) AND an AT&T Plant Engineer, again probably with a model for a high take rate Might try posting this question in the Frontier forum, to see if there are any responses, about Frontier possibly crossing the ILEC boundary in a unique situation such as this » www.att.com/att/multifam ··· roperty/ -- AT&T Connected Communities |
|
| |
Anonccf26 to joshuad31
Anon
2016-Nov-8 11:39 am
to joshuad31
You had to move? Looks like a choice you made rather than a forced move. It isn't unusual to find apartment complexes with a specified ISP and no options. It might have made more sense to find a complex that offered what you wanted and move there since you were going to move anyway. But that must not have occurred to you.
If you actually work in networking you should be able to understand what has been said. And the idea that one provider would lease their lines inside a complex to another provider seems ludicrous to me but then again I'm not a "network engineer" and probably don't have the same basis for logic decisions you have. |
|
|
| |
to joshuad31
said by joshuad31:Explain it to me like I'm not in telecom You are expecting too much, especially if you are paying for / relying on residential grade services for "business critical" needs. |
|
| |
well fios has 99% uptime. That is all I need. Lots of people work from home. I worked from home and more than half of my team worked from home for 5 years and I never had any problems. I mean just look at the FCC complaint I posted. The packet loss is unreal. » dl.dropboxusercontent.co ··· ints.htm |
|
maartenaElmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA |
to joshuad31
said by joshuad31:Are any laws being broken here when consumers are not given a choice and when service is so bad that people who need access to business critical internet with decent uptime are forced to move?
Explain it to me like I'm not in telecom The fiber you have in your building is not for internet. No laws are being broken. AT&T doesn't have to provide you anything if they don't want to. Neither does Verizon or the cable company. The borders of what company services what areas were drawn up a long time ago, and they aren't always the same as property lines. It could be that the property you are on was once 2, 3 maybe even 4 or 5 different plots of land owned by different owners. A developer bought all plots of land, had the property lines redrawn with the city, and went ahead building your apartment complex, whenever that was.... 10, 20, 30 years ago. That does not mean however the telecom borders have changed. They may indeed still lay in the middle, right on one of the former property lines. So now you are in a fairly uncommon situation of having 2 providers on the property, each provider having a piece of the pie so to speak. Neither of them probably want to give it up as customers are customers, and neither one of them want to allow the other to build on their turf. The decision here lies SOLELY with AT&T and Verizon. If they both do the happy dance and both think it is a jolly good idea to overbuild on the other side, it may happen. In reality though, it's probably not going to happen. Your solution may just be that you move away from that apartment complex altogether. |
|
| |
Anonccf26 to joshuad31
Anon
2016-Nov-8 3:22 pm
to joshuad31
The point is that if you want to do business on the connection pay for a business connection. Then you might have some leverage. Paying for a residential connection for business, i.e. working from home, doesn't get you any sympathy. Expecting the FCC to do anything in a case like this is not going to work. |
|
 devil24
Premium Member
join:2002-06-28
San Antonio, TX |
devil24
Premium Member
2016-Nov-8 3:41 pm
said by Anonccf26 :The point is that if you want to do business on the connection pay for a business connection. Then you might have some leverage. Paying for a residential connection for business, i.e. working from home, doesn't get you any sympathy. Expecting the FCC to do anything in a case like this is not going to work. ^^^ This ^^^ With residential service, there are no express uptime guarantees. Need to have that? get yourself a business account and pay the extra premium. |
|
| |
to joshuad31
said by joshuad31:well fios has 99% uptime. That is all I need. Lots of people work from home. I worked from home and more than half of my team worked from home for 5 years and I never had any problems. So, when did you start having problems and what was the cause of them? |
|
| |
to joshuad31
NVM what I said before. I saw this » www.att.com/att/multifam ··· ctv.html and yeah AT&T will use fiber for Directv and up to 1 gigabit internet. There are no more dishes. |
|
| |
copper wiring is upgraded within select multi-family or condo properties.
They are talking about the in property wiring. Now if they have a vrad on property then it may be easy. But some places may just have fiber from the dish to near the units. |
|
| |
to djmaxwell
From day 1. The cause must be due to circuit interference because different sites on the internet went down at different times. It was never that the circuit was 100% up and then 100% down. I moved so I'm not sure what the problem was. |
|
| |
said by joshuad31:From day 1. The cause must be due to circuit interference because different sites on the internet went down at different times. It was never that the circuit was 100% up and then 100% down. I moved so I'm not sure what the problem was. I thought you said you worked from home for 5 years without any problem. |
|
maartenaElmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA |
to joshuad31
said by joshuad31:well fios has 99% uptime. That is all I need. Lots of people work from home. I worked from home and more than half of my team worked from home for 5 years and I never had any problems. I mean just look at the FCC complaint I posted. The packet loss is unreal. Yes, many people work from home. Using a residential connection. However, they go down and have problems. If you are doing business, and it is absolutely critical that you have internet during all hours of the day, you get a business type connection. I am satisfied with my cable connection when working from home. If I am on a critical project and my cable connection fails me, I use my phone as an access point, my LTE phone tests at 15-25 Mbps most times, which is more than plenty to VPN in and access all the servers at work using RDP. My cable also has 99% uptime. But there is absolutely NO guarantee it will stay that way. If they dig up and cut a cable down the street, it could be several days before it is back up..... especially if that cable doesn't have any business connections on it and only connects residents. So you should always plan for a backup if you have a residential connection. Actually, you should always have a backup period. For me its Verizon LTE as an alternative to my TWC Cable. Works for me. I've thrown my phone on the kitchen table before and had both me and my wife connect through it without problems during a power outage..... both our laptop batteries were charged, and we enjoyed internet for the entire 2+ hours the outage lasted. |
|
| |
to djmaxwell
Yes at different locations. I moved to this address just recently. I have had verizon, cox / time warner cable, then AT&T and finally Frontier as my ISP at different times. AT&T I only used 2 months before being forced to move again because they could not provide me internet service. I don't live out in the middle of nowhere. I live in the Dallas suburban metropolitan area in modern apartments built in the last 15 years but still AT&T cannot provide service to infrastructure they built only 15 years ago!!! |
|
| joshuad31 |
to maartena
But check the FCC complaint. I posted a link earlier in this thread. I always at all times of the day had consistent packet loss exceeding 95% when the connection was good and exceeding 80% when the connection was bad. So my situation is quite a bit different from the one you are describing. It amounts to nothing less than fraud as you can see here: » fcctest.zendesk.com/atta ··· sing.pdfcompletely unacceptable behavior from a major ISP |
|
| |
Anonccf26
Anon
2016-Nov-10 1:27 pm
"It amounts to nothing less than fraud"
The same could be said of using a residential account for business. But I suppose that didn't bear on your thought process. |
|
| |
to joshuad31
said by joshuad31:But check the FCC complaint. I posted a link earlier in this thread. I always at all times of the day had consistent packet loss exceeding 95% when the connection was good and exceeding 80% when the connection was bad. So my situation is quite a bit different from the one you are describing.
It amounts to nothing less than fraud as you can see here:
»fcctest.zendesk.com/atta ··· sing.pdf
completely unacceptable behavior from a major ISP I presume you mean packet loss of 15% and 20%? As for fraud, what is AT&T's definition of reliable? |
|
 ·T-Mobile
3 edits |
to joshuad31
said by joshuad31:The way users understand the world is different from technical telecom professionals. I only know the following facts: 1. In the same apartment complex there are two providers but no ability for consumers to choose their provider. More than likely that's the way building management wants it, with an MDU the company managing the building can bulk contract with a service provider, and if they agree to only allow a single provider access to the building the monthly payment they receive from the selected provider is commonly greater than if they had allowed multiple providers to compete for subscribers. 2. If you live on the west side of the complex you must choose AT&T U-verse as your provider. If you live on the east side of the complex you must choose Frontier (Verizon) Fios. It could very well be one building was lit up before the other and the first provider got beat on the bulk rate and the per subscriber payment to management or it could be a turf issue which really complicates things. 3. My service was so bad I had no choice but to move from AT&Ts U-verse side to the Verizon side. That's a choice you are free to make providing management will allow you to transfer your lease to the new unit. 4. Opening up a complaint with the FCC and the BBB did nothing to fix the problem because the engineers that AT&T send out to come onsite tell you "I can't troubleshoot packet loss just connectivity and speed." That's why it is called a best effort service and priced accordingly. 5. The situation seems messed up to me for the following reasons: A. AT&T cant provide reliable service By who's definition of reliable? Where in writing is unacceptable level of packet loss defined, if it's not defined, then what ever losses you are getting are actually acceptable. B. I can't get fios even thou my neighbors 3 blocks away can. That is something you should have checked into before relocating there. C. If Verizon could lease out DirecTVs fiber lines and coax infrastructure then maybe I could get Fios. But why should they VZ would much rather sell you service carried over their own fiber, that way they have control over it and don't need to involve a competing company in service problems when they arise. I'm just pissed that I had to move. I tried to get my neighbors to open FCC / BBB complaints but they all use the internet for netflix, youtube, and sending emails not for any business critical uses so most poeple don't seem to care that there is a lot of packet loss in our building. If all around you are happy with what they are getting and you are not, a look in the mirror might reveal the root cause of that issue. If what you are doing is truly "business critical" have you checked into getting a dedicated fiber circuit, the installation is usually less than a couple of grand and if you sign a long term agreement, the monthly cost can be as low as $600 per month for 10 meg and you get a guaranteed QOS, which would define what is and is not an acceptable packet loss. I can't get AT&T to refund me back the first two months I paid. I also can't get them to pay for moving costs. That doesn't seem right to me. Why should they pay moving costs? That was a decision you made and you must absorb the costs for doing so, not the service provider you cancelled service with. Everyone seems to think that this messed up arrangement is perfectly normal and I just don't get it. Again mirror check time. There is fiber going to my building it is just being poorly used. As defined by a person who admitted he is not technically savvy in telecommunications and then by default the OSP. If it could be leased out to someone who wants to use it to give me good service then I might have a choice. You really don't know that, that fiber may very well dedicated for a single purpose and the owner of it may not wish to share it with anyone else, due to the possibility of service interruptions to a large number of subscribers by the secondary user. Can anyone explain to me why this sort of two providers 0 choice for consumers in the same apartment complex setup is normal? Already have. Can anyone explain to me why DirecTV can't just lease out their last mile fiber / coax infrastructure to Verizon so I can get decent service? Because their parent company is in the business of leasing fiber, plus I doubt DirecTV has any UNE agreements with VZ. Can any one tell me why people in my building don't care that they have 10% packet loss. Because the service meets their needs at a price they are happy with. Are any laws being broken here when consumers are not given a choice and when service is so bad that people who need access to business critical internet with decent uptime are forced to move? There are no laws being broken, because more then likely there are other services available to you. if you are willing to pay the upfront costs and monthly charges. However that statement must be tempered by the fact your building is probably not intended for commercial use, as such any service provider would need to work with building management to bring a service to you and that can get even more expensive. Explain it to me like I'm not in telecom Just did. |
|
| Well Bonded |
to ILpt4U
said by ILpt4U:Again, would need to get in touch with an AT&T Sales Manager (AT&T Connected Communities does have a website for this, too) AND an AT&T Plant Engineer, again probably with a model for a high take rate While it is possible, the chances of that happening are slim to none, for AT&T to operate in VZ turf they must first register as a CLEC and then enter into UNE contracts with the local ILEC, before even meeting with building management. Failing to do so would expose them to local regulatory and FCC fines. |
|
maartenaElmo
Premium Member
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA |
to joshuad31
said by joshuad31:But check the FCC complaint. I posted a link earlier in this thread. I always at all times of the day had consistent packet loss exceeding 95% when the connection was good and exceeding 80% when the connection was bad. So my situation is quite a bit different from the one you are describing.
It amounts to nothing less than fraud as you can see here:
»fcctest.zendesk.com/atta ··· sing.pdf
completely unacceptable behavior from a major ISP Unacceptable: Yes. But an ISP is not a utility. I wouldn't mind it would be held up to the same standards (after all, you wouldn't like it if you only got 70 volts to your outlets instead of 110, or the water pressure is so low a tap literary trickles....), but it isn't that way. If your ISP can't get their shit together, it is time to switch. It may cost you a LOT more money, e.g. going to a business connection, but at least then you have some form of SLA. Because a residential ISP will not have ANY guarantees, and the only thing they will do for you when things don't work is give you a discount on your monthly bill. The FCC might help, it might not. It could force the ISP to look at your case a lot better, but they can also just ignore it and tell the FCC: "Go ahead, make my day....". |
|
·